Waste in Bad Messaging

Waste in Bad Messaging

Whoa, a post from the missing-in-action Learning About Lean guy??  Yeah, I’m still here and working through an incredibly fascinating and hectic stage of growth.  I’ve simply not chosen to blog much in the face of major priorities.  But, I’m coming to the surface and will be back more now.

 

Two fellows I respect blogged yesterday on an important issue, triggering this post.

 

Hal Macomber writes on Explaining Misunderstanding.  Hal urges us to carefully consider how we communicate and not just blurt or act our way along. Instead, we need to both reflect and then be inquisitive, asking good questions to understand. 

 

Tom Peters writes on the odds of getting anything right.  Using the unlikely scenario of little-known George Mason getting to the finals of the NCAA Basketball tournament, Peters points out how each level of communication lowers the likelihood that we will achieve what we wanted to achieve. 

 

Taken together, with Tom arguing for decreasing the number of layers and Hal arguing for reflection and curiosity, here is a powerful argument for going directly to the people involved in a decision and then taking enough time to understand how a proposal comes across.  Most of us have to fight nature to do this…and it’s worth the fight.